The campaign, launched by the youth-led Afghan Peace Volunteers, aims to find two million friends or supporters worldwide - the approximate number of Afghans killed in 40 years of war - and to deliver to the United Nations its call for a cease-fire and negotiated end to the war on December 10, International Human Rights Day.

Here in the US, the war in Afghanistan is hardly mentioned by the presidential or congressional candidates (Mitt Romney completely omitted it from his acceptance speech at the Republican Convention). With only about one percent of the population directly involved in the war, with a family member in the service, the war is so low on the public radar screen that Council on Foreign Relations analyst Max Boot dubbed it the "Who Cares?" war, and many in the military fret about the seeming indifference to the sacrifice and hardships of our troops and returning veterans. This angle was prominent in 9/11 anniversary news coverage.

Such a narrative is too shallow, as there are many ironies and contradictions regarding public support, or lack thereof, for the Afghanistan war, and as to how the public feels about the troops and veterans.

As a peace activist, invariably opposed to this country's many, many wars, I do care about the troops and returning vets (my brother is a psychologist at the Veterans Administration hospital in the Bronx, meaning unfortunately he has a job for life dealing with the trauma our endless war-making inflicts on those who fight them), as do all the peace activists I know.

I knew a wonderful young man, a Marine reservist who died in Iraq. He was opposed to the war, but felt he had to go, that he couldn't have claimed conscientious objector status (as I and others counseled him to do, and I believe he had a pretty good case). He felt he couldn't let the others in his unit down, though he vehemently opposed the war. The military counts on that type of coercion or guilt to keep troops in line and returning to combat time and again.

In terms of nobody "caring about the war," there are many dynamics at play. Polls consistently show a solid majority of the US populace is now against the war, but there are neither widespread protests nor large-scale organized war-tax resistance (although I was proud to march in Chicago last May at the NATO protest with veterans returning their medals to protest the wars). Certainly there are some partisan politics at play here, with anti-war liberals not wanting to criticize President Obama, or feeling "okay" with his promise to end the war by the end of 2014 (though a "Foreign Policy" article recently speculated up to 25,000 U.S. troops may remain for a decade as part of an agreement with the Afghan government).

The Pentagon can't have it both ways. Military brass and civilian leaders don't want a draft, understandably, as they don't want to deal with hassles from soldiers who don't want to be in the service (that is a lesson the Pentagon learned from the Vietnam War and the rampant resistance and anti-war organizing by conscripts). The poverty draft, whereby urban and rural youth with poor job and educational prospects in their communities see the military as an attractive career option, especially in a week economy, suits the Pentagon just fine.

Moreover, the "Department of War" gets an endless supply of our tax dollars to fight its wars and maintain the largest military in human history. They want us to "care" more? Even with multiple "support the troops" programs and manifestations all over society (Michelle Obama and Jill Biden are constantly stressing this, as do many others)? Which is not to disparage such efforts, we do need to support the troops, and the best way to do that is to get them home to their families as soon as possible. Even longtime hawk US Rep. Bill Young, a Republican from Florida who chairs the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and is Congress's longest serving member, now advocates this.

If there was a draft, the war would be over in a month - if not sooner. The public wouldn't stand for it, because this war fails miserably in meeting the real definition of a just war (the horse sense definition, not the Catholic Church's official Just War theory regarding using force as a last resort, with proportionality and protection for noncombatants and other criteria).

The real definition of a just war is one you'd send your kid to.

So mark me down as caring about the troops, and about getting them the best possible medical, psychological, financial and career services we can provide when they get home. I don't see how Pentagon brass can ask for more than that, unless their real goal is to continue the war indefinitely.

The campaign, launched by the youth-led Afghan Peace Volunteers, aims to find two million friends or supporters worldwide - the approximate number of Afghans killed in 40 years of war - and to deliver to the United Nations its call for a cease-fire and negotiated end to the war on December 10, International Human Rights Day.

Here in the US, the war in Afghanistan is hardly mentioned by the presidential or congressional candidates (Mitt Romney completely omitted it from his acceptance speech at the Republican Convention). With only about one percent of the population directly involved in the war, with a family member in the service, the war is so low on the public radar screen that Council on Foreign Relations analyst Max Boot dubbed it the "Who Cares?" war, and many in the military fret about the seeming indifference to the sacrifice and hardships of our troops and returning veterans. This angle was prominent in 9/11 anniversary news coverage.

Such a narrative is too shallow, as there are many ironies and contradictions regarding public support, or lack thereof, for the Afghanistan war, and as to how the public feels about the troops and veterans.

As a peace activist, invariably opposed to this country's many, many wars, I do care about the troops and returning vets (my brother is a psychologist at the Veterans Administration hospital in the Bronx, meaning unfortunately he has a job for life dealing with the trauma our endless war-making inflicts on those who fight them), as do all the peace activists I know.

I knew a wonderful young man, a Marine reservist who died in Iraq. He was opposed to the war, but felt he had to go, that he couldn't have claimed conscientious objector status (as I and others counseled him to do, and I believe he had a pretty good case). He felt he couldn't let the others in his unit down, though he vehemently opposed the war. The military counts on that type of coercion or guilt to keep troops in line and returning to combat time and again.

In terms of nobody "caring about the war," there are many dynamics at play. Polls consistently show a solid majority of the US populace is now against the war, but there are neither widespread protests nor large-scale organized war-tax resistance (although I was proud to march in Chicago last May at the NATO protest with veterans returning their medals to protest the wars). Certainly there are some partisan politics at play here, with anti-war liberals not wanting to criticize President Obama, or feeling "okay" with his promise to end the war by the end of 2014 (though a "Foreign Policy" article recently speculated up to 25,000 U.S. troops may remain for a decade as part of an agreement with the Afghan government).

The Pentagon can't have it both ways. Military brass and civilian leaders don't want a draft, understandably, as they don't want to deal with hassles from soldiers who don't want to be in the service (that is a lesson the Pentagon learned from the Vietnam War and the rampant resistance and anti-war organizing by conscripts). The poverty draft, whereby urban and rural youth with poor job and educational prospects in their communities see the military as an attractive career option, especially in a week economy, suits the Pentagon just fine.

Moreover, the "Department of War" gets an endless supply of our tax dollars to fight its wars and maintain the largest military in human history. They want us to "care" more? Even with multiple "support the troops" programs and manifestations all over society (Michelle Obama and Jill Biden are constantly stressing this, as do many others)? Which is not to disparage such efforts, we do need to support the troops, and the best way to do that is to get them home to their families as soon as possible. Even longtime hawk US Rep. Bill Young, a Republican from Florida who chairs the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and is Congress's longest serving member, now advocates this.

If there was a draft, the war would be over in a month - if not sooner. The public wouldn't stand for it, because this war fails miserably in meeting the real definition of a just war (the horse sense definition, not the Catholic Church's official Just War theory regarding using force as a last resort, with proportionality and protection for noncombatants and other criteria).

The real definition of a just war is one you'd send your kid to.

So mark me down as caring about the troops, and about getting them the best possible medical, psychological, financial and career services we can provide when they get home. I don't see how Pentagon brass can ask for more than that, unless their real goal is to continue the war indefinitely.